loop_start

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description describes key behavior: activating the supervisor lane and returning only section 0. It does not detail side effects, idempotency, or state changes, but the disclosed behavior is sufficient for safe invocation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is five sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the main action, then provides examples and return behavior. Every sentence adds value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the description covers the main operation and return behavior, it does not explain the role of 'runId' or how this tool fits with siblings like loop_next. Given two required params and no output schema, the description is adequate but has gaps.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 50%: 'loop' has a description which the tool's description reinforces, but 'runId' lacks any description in schema or description. The description adds moderate value for 'loop' but does not fully compensate for the missing runId context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool begins phase-gated streaming and opens/activates the supervisor lane for a loop. It specifies valid loop values like 'strip-miner' and 'loop-de-loop', distinguishing it from siblings like loop_next or loop_register.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides examples of when to use the tool (e.g., 'Use strip-miner...') but does not explicitly compare with alternatives like loop_next or loop_register. It implies usage context but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.